If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I see no problem with the thread. The people we hire to hire these "non-essentials" gave them the title. What is non-essential? Not necessary for world peace? Not necessary for recreation, collecting taxes, bombing countries, patrolling borders and national monuments, Obama's servants, Congress? Maybe a definition of essential employees is in order. those necessary to keep the government running. Non-essential to me in not frigging needed ever and should be eliminated.

preformance based redeployment. an office of 4 with 1 doing all the work will have 2 moved to a place with need.

Ken, you must have never worked in Govt. it would take 4 more employees to determine where to send the the 2 that should be moved... But you have the math down. 4 with 1 doing all the work. Move 2. What about the other one?

RIF across the board, with the exception of the military, 25% at a minimum. Every agency. Start with those eligible for retirement, then move on to the performance appraisals- if you don't meet the minimum satisfactory you're out. Then tenure. It needs to be done.

RIF across the board, with the exception of the military, 25% at a minimum. Every agency. Start with those eligible for retirement, then move on to the performance appraisals- if you don't meet the minimum satisfactory you're out. Then tenure. It needs to be done.

and you don't think there is a little bloat in the military in some areas?? That's laughable. See the problem with cuts across the board is that there are some programs that actually work, and cutting them hurts them. I don't deny that there are other programs that could have a 25%, or even 50% cut and we wouldn't see any difference. I"m all for performance based evaluation.... we'd pass with flying colors.

and you don't think there is a little bloat in the military in some areas?? That's laughable. See the problem with cuts across the board is that there are some programs that actually work, and cutting them hurts them. I don't deny that there are other programs that could have a 25%, or even 50% cut and we wouldn't see any difference. I"m all for performance based evaluation.... we'd pass with flying colors.

It is amusing to me that many talk about CUTS! The fact of the matter the talk is in reality a REDUCTION OF GROWTH of the Gov.! Historically, the size of the Fed. Gov. was about 18%. Today it is between 24-26% of GDP and GROWING! Yet there is whining about cuts. My response, is no cuts, let's start with reduction in growth, THEN there could be talk about CUTS.

Fire Dept. has a lot of people just sitting around also.... until there is a fire. Your definition of Nonessential and the Govt. definition of Nonessential are pretty different.

That might be how it is in some nice quiet suburb. My dad worked on a rescue squad in the Detroit Fire Department. They used to normally see 20+ runs in a 24 hour shift. They would drag people out of at least 4 fires a day. Some of his friends died on the job, others permanently disabled. And when they weren't on runs, the were hanging hoses in the tower to dry and restocking the trucks with hose, supplies, and maintaing equipment. Not a lot of sitting around "just waiting." Unfortunately, a lot of those guys might be losing their pensions. The guys on the job will likely lose insurance. The would be better off working at Walmart of McDonalds... I have no idea how they expect them and the police to risk their lives when the call for help comes.

"For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48